The Mediterranean: an area of change

Josè Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, General Secretary of the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE) writes of the future of this important region.

Only a decade ago the Mediterranean was considered as a region shaken by conflict and confrontation. But today the Mediterranean can best be described as an area of change. The most meaningful changes in the region have to do with the developments within its societies but also with the changing regional dynamics, which are trying to shape a new future for it with all the changes which globalisation brings. A globalised world is one where everything has an influence on everyone. A globalised world can be a more ordered and balanced world if the interdependence of and the communication between its parts works in a constructive way.

But the phenomena which promote globalisation can also bring about the exclusion of whole communities and the division of others and may open up deep differences between those who are part of the global dynamic and those who, unable to take part, are left on the sidelines. Whether inclusion or exclusion predominate or order or conflict prevail depends on there being sufficient global co-operation and on strategies being adopted which favour social cohesion in every one of its countries.

It is in this context of change and uncertainty that the Euro-Mediterranean Conference took place in Barcelona five years ago. At that moment interdependence, shared responsibility in the political and security sphere and in cultural, social and human spheres was what was inspiring the actions of the European Union and of the countries of the Mediterranean. A very ambitious programme based on political and economic co-operation was started which would favour the growth of the countries of the South and give stability to the zone. What is the result today? If I had to draw up a balance sheet of progress made to date I would be able to be very optimistic. Criticism has come from both sides: some say projects have been launched which are inadequate for member countries, others say it is very difficult to give the right aid and finance in the absence of real economic reform. It is also alleged that the countries are uninterested in discussing questions of internal politics and security.

Many people felt that Barcelona strengthened economic relations between the centre and the periphery while trade and intra-regional investment did not develop. However that may be, the data at our disposal paint a very clear picture of the situation. Despite its large size the MEDA programme which is the main financial instrument of the Barcelona Process has spent only 26 per cent of its budget. The association agreements are being ratified very slowly by the national parliament of the European Union countries. Up to now the only ones which have come into force are those with Tunisia, Morocco and Israel with the rest awaiting ratification or being negotiated. Much remains to be done and accordingly it is vital to recover the consensus that there was in Barcelona if we want to offer a future to the region.

For the Socialist Party, for those who were members of socialist governments, thought about the Mediterranean reflected an idea which Felipe González often expresses, one that I share. The political plans Spain has, he says, are better defended in Europe. The Mediterranean cannot be just a Spanish, French or Italian priority but one for all Europeans.

In the Barcelona Declaration there is a central element which develops and deepens the idea of shared security and that our security, and much less our prosperity, cannot be achieved at the expense of our neighbour's security and prosperity. But Barcelona also brings in, in a more effective and mature way than the Helsinki Final Act, a broad sense of security in which the traditional military dimension is just one more element, and not the most relevant one, to guarantee peace. It is an effort for political co-operation among us peoples who share this geographic space; it is an act of rebellion, an unwillingness to resign ourselves to accepting the "clash of civilisations" that Samuel Huntington predicts. It is also an undertaking to promote the social and economic development on the southern shore of the Mediterranean, a bet placed on cohesion in the widest sense of that term. We must therefore undertake a critical revision of the Barcelona process without losing sight of the validity of its principle and objectives.

Although it corresponds to another Committee of the Socialist International to analyse the situation in the Near East I must make a brief reference to it. If the climate of peace and dialogue then existing five years ago made possible the Barcelona agreement with the participation of all sides, the murder of Rabin and the subsequent victory of the Likud brought the peace process down a blind alley. We know that the Mediterranean is the cradle of civilisations but it is also a zone of conflict, divisions and confrontations. This "liquid continent" as some call it, has been suffering serious confrontations, regional conflicts for reasons of cultural, ethnic or religious identity unknown up to now in the face of a lack of solidarity from a world which cares little about underdevelopment and poverty. There is no doubt that the Palestine-Israeli conflict is the one which has been most affected by these changes, it is the one which most worries us, which has provoked most destabilisation in the zone, which has most put in jeopardy the delicate balance of the region, which has, in a word, wrecked our desire for peace.

Here I would like to call on the parties involved to recover their confidence and return to dialogue so as to offer a future and some hope to their people. It is a call to Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat but also to their parties present in this committee. Let us get down together to work to recover Rabin's legacy and desire for peace: let us recover the drive towards the "peace of the brave". But let us go farther, let us talk too of the "peace of the citizens". Let us pull the whole society into the peace process since that will be the only way to achieve it. As Michel Rocard often says, "politics is repeating over and over again formulas and ideas until they impregnate society". So it is moment for leaders to involve the citizens in this crucial and absorbing challenge.

The countries on the south side of the Mediterranean have put into effect changes which in great measure respond to the requirements of Barcelona, overcoming protectionist obstacles, starting the process of privatisation and so on. The change is affecting societies themselves and in some countries processes of transition, of democratic alternance in government have been started which moreover have gone hand in hand with a consolidation of freedoms and human rights. We must not allow this to be frustrated or discredited. We shall not abandon those who have started out along this path.

One objective which needs, more than words, an effort of will is that of boosting South-South relations which now represent less than 5 per cent of their trade. Can we think that a free trade area between the European Union and it's partners is viable and desirable if it is not based on the integration of at least the sub-regional groups on the southern shores of the Mediterranean? Some countries have put in place the process of change but they can hardly achieve it without help and encouragement.

At the same time how long can we continue to justify the free circulation of goods and services which excludes farm products? Is a development process credible which does not contemplate the removal of the greatest obstacle to it, foreign debt?

I am convinced that the creation of a common Euro-Mediterranean space is the best and most advantageous way to confront the challenges of globalisation. But as Miguel Angel Moratinos has shown, the only realistic scenario is to recast a globalisation which for the moment only looks to goods but which in the not too distant future must look to human beings. If we are to avoid globalisation bringing on injustice and inequality we must all join together to regulate flows of migrants and fight against racism and xenophobia. Migration is also part of globalisation and must occupy a prominent place on our political agenda. We must propose policies which favour development at the same time as encouraging the integration of those who come to our country. We need policies to prepare people to meet those of other countries and deal with the mixing of peoples, policies which preserve identity and favour pluralism.

The Nice European Council did not face the great challenges which the presence of new members of the EU brings in its wake and I do not think there exists a vision of what sort of Europe is being offered to new members. There are no guarantees that that Europe will be more economically and socially cohesive and more coherent in its policies. I am deeply worried that the majority of member states are sticking to financial strategies which were in Berlin shown to be inadequate and which today are simply not credible as a response to the agreement and objectives which are before us. In a word I am worried about the lack of political will and leadership that the Union is suffering and, consequently, its Mediterranean policy is suffering.

Spain has a clear part to play in the Mediterranean world, not just because of geo-strategic reasons but also, principally for historical reasons. In the EU Spain made a start with policies based on solidarity and co-operation. It created links with all the countries of the Mediterranean basin and set up channels of communication to bring about permanent dialogue based on mutual confidence. The 1991 Peace Conference in Madrid was no accident but rather a consequence of the firm commitment we made to the region. The paradox today is that we are absent from the region. That is why I am today committed to reviving the spirit of Barcelona and to develop the potential contained in the Barcelona Declaration.

The truth is that there are problems and solutions, rapprochement and divergences on policy but there are also many possibilities. Of the 20 countries around the shores of the Mediterranean four of them Spain, Italy, France and Greece enjoy 88 per cent of the region. As socialists we believe that all of us people and states in the region can advance together towards peace, prosperity, dialogue and solidarity. We seek a stable, prosperous and developed Mediterranean with which we can come together in a relationship of joint responsibility on all subjects which affects us, including migration. We must not forget that Europe is a continent of emigrants and that there are more than two million Spanish citizens in other countries. And I use the word citizens advisedly because we are talking about dignity and the recognition of the dignity of the human person that some, it appears, forget. And moreover as every day goes by the EU will be needing more foreign labour not just to fill empty workplaces but also to sustain a system of pensions in an ageing society which is not enjoying sufficient demographic growth. In this sense immigration ceases to be a problem and starts becoming a necessity.

When people move they take their culture with them. Let us confront the "clash of civilisations" with the dialogue of cultures. The great world religions have shown how ideas and beliefs can bestride continents and transform societies. David Held, professor of political science at the London School of Economics reminded us at a conference in Madrid that states must face up to the present challenges and find solutions to them, and one of these is emigration. The rapid spread of the media, the internet and digital technologies have allowed information to circulate rapidly in this increasingly globalised world. If it seems that globalisation may bring advantages in the economic terrain, in the cultural and social field we still have many questions to solve. Phenomena such as the resurgence of ethnic nationalism and all types of fundamentalism are just some examples. As a solution Held puts forward cosmopolitanism, i.e. "the recognition of the ties among the different cultures which live together in one country, the celebration of the difference and the ability to consider the other person's point of view". Let us learn to be cosmopolitan Mediterranean people and respect our differences.

Europe has a great responsibility in the positive and negative development of this new stage and its commitment is urgently needed. If there are two words to describe the present situation of the Mediterranean region they are imbalance and interdependence.

Nor can we forget the delays and failures in this whole process. I think again of Oslo, of the Middle East peace process. We must learn the lesson. The patience of citizens can be exhausted and we have the obligation to make the Mediterranean a zone of development and peace. Let not the necessary expansion of the EU towards the countries of the Baltic mean that unfulfilled pledges are forgotten.

We must be ambitious and have the necessary political will so as to get to the year 2010 with a free trade area in being but also so as to have better social and cultural relations. But we must first agree among ourselves.

Signed articles represent the views of the authors only, not necessarily those of Socialist Affairs or the Socialist International

TO SUBSCRIBE TO SOCIALIST AFFAIRS

Annual subscription (4 issues):
United Kingdom - 12 pounds sterling
Other countries - 15 pounds sterling

Payment by Sterling cheque made payable to the Socialist International.

Or by Visa or Mastercard (please send name, card number, expiry date, with billing and delivery address).